Talk:Fall of Tarsonis
Timeline I believe we shouldn't add a specific date to the conflicts, just the year in which it happened, since there are many different sources and many different dates for one conflict, specially this one. *sigh* Miss the old timeline... :( Omega20 10:16, September 4, 2010 (UTC) I miss the old timeline too, but for better or worse, we're stuck with the current one. And like the timeline itself, I think we're obliged to reflect that. It doesn't really make for good form if every GW and BW battle article only has a year, which prevents any sense of chronological progression being sensed.--Hawki 12:52, September 4, 2010 (UTC) I agree with you. Unfortunaterly, there are just too many dates for this single event to give it an accurate one. StarCraft: Ghost sets it around June, StarCraft I says the fall of Tarsonis happened around January, and others state that it happened on February or other dates. We can't give this an accurate date, because it hasn't. Even the date of the UED invasion of Char, accurately reported in the game itself to be April 23-May 5, cannot be added in the article because of this weird new timeline. Omega20 13:26, September 4, 2010 (UTC) Keep in mind that the Jan. dates stem from cut material. As for Feb., it's definatly a case of retconning, given the switch in comic dates-dates that fell within a month of the HD timeline being released and WoL makes a case for it as well via the end of BW. Our current timeline modus operandi is to give distinct dates, while making notes where appropriate (e.g. record the DTS discrepency in 2503, but don't give alternate dates on every single page). There's still many HD dates I disagree with, but I accept that there should be consistancy.--Hawki 14:14, September 4, 2010 (UTC) Omega, please look at the updated canon policy (from April 2010). It explains such things as why we're not using StarCraft: Ghost: Nova s June date. Part of the new timeline policy involves explaining where dates come from in the appropriate year article. For challenges and so forth, please take a look at the explanation, then challenge the date if you see fit. PSH aka Kimera 757 (talk) ) 14:21, September 4, 2010 (UTC) Crashed Battlecruiser So I just re-read chapter 14 of Liberty's Crusade. There's a reference to a crashed battlecruiser there. "The city had taken the assault hard. The western precincts were still in flames caused by a battlecruiser that had gone down in their midst..." It doesn't say who the battlecruiser belonged to, or how the heroes got down there. The previous chapter contains no information this either, since it concerned Antiga Prime. In short, why would you say Raynor and Kerrigan landed on Tarsonis in a battlecruiser when there's no evidence in the source (or any source) to support this? PSH aka Kimera 757 (talk) ) 20:49, December 31, 2010 (UTC) :I assumed so (but I agree that there's no evidence solid enough to imply it) that that's the only logical way for the heroes to get there: the most-wanted rebels in the Confederacy couldn't have just landed in the middle of Confederacy's capital city, so I assumed that this was Sons of Korhal battlecruiser that crashed during Duke's attack on the platform (and it is also unlikely that it belong to Confederacy, since I don't think Kerrigan and Raynor could knock it off the sky during the street fighting). XEL 22:55, December 31, 2010 (UTC) ::There's a few problems with that. First, you assumed, so it's speculation. Second, crash-landing an expensive battlecruiser is dangerous; you could kill everyone inside. Third, how do you get out now that you've crashed your means of transportation? Fourth, using a civilian vehicle is a much better idea; when the Confederacy orders all ships to land, you "follow orders". Fifth, where does it say anything about a battlecruiser crashing during the platform invasion? Certainly not in Liberty's Crusade (the source), and not in the game either. PSH aka Kimera 757 (talk) ) 00:31, January 1, 2011 (UTC) :::Note that I don't assume that SoK deliberatly crashed that battlecruiser (since that's unlikely and would an unreasonable think to do), it was obviously shot down by the Confederates. :::As for your fifth point, the street fighting in Tarsonis City CLEARLY takes place during The Big Push, because the end of Chapter 14 takes place simultaenously with the end of The Big Push (the conversation between Mengsk, Kerrigan and Raynor about the activation of psi-emitters), so the street fighting takes place during Duke's attack on the platform. :::All in all I think it'd be better if we mention that the fighting started around the time of that battlecruiser crash, but don't say whom it belonged to dut to the lack of any solid evidence. XEL 01:30, January 1, 2011 (UTC) Diamondbacks. Diamondbacks Due to the diamondbacks basically next to dead defilers in the SC2 campaign I think we should add them to the forces section under the confederacy. Nolanstar (talk) 19:17, February 13, 2015 (UTC) Nolanstar :Added.--Hawki (talk) 21:35, February 13, 2015 (UTC)